Re: [RFC] Another 64 bit CORE_ADDR & 32 bit target address printing botch

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>]

> On Sep 7, 11:33pm, Fred Fish wrote:
> 
> 
>> I found another place where 32 bit addresses with the MSB set are printed 
>> as 0xffffffffxxxxxxxx.  I hacked around the problem with this patch,
>> but it might not be the best place to do it.  Any better ideas?
> 
> 
> Was this on MIPS?  Aren't these addresses supposed to be sign extended on
> MIPS?

Yep, the value is definitly correct.

> In any event, if the address stored in the CORE_ADDR is incorrect, I think
> it'd be better to fix it at the point where it's being stored incorrectly.

The problem isn't with the sign extension.  Rather, its with the 
function proper.  The comment:

>     /* FIXME: cagney/2002-05-03: Need local_address_string() function
>        that returns the language localized string formatted to a width
>        based on TARGET_ADDR_BIT.  */

drops a vague hit as to the problem.  The function is ment to be 
printing an address (of size TARGET_ADDR_BIT) and not a CORE_ADDR (of 
size sizeof (CORE_ADDR) * HOST_CHAR_BIT).  The function name 
(..._core_addr), unfortunatly really confuses this.

I'm just left wondering if the code should also check for truncation. 
That CORE_ADDR -> address -> CORE_ADDR doesn't loose information.  Hmm, 
grub grub:

/* Print address ADDR on STREAM.  USE_LOCAL means the same thing as for
    print_longest.  */
void
print_address_numeric (CORE_ADDR addr, int use_local, struct ui_file 
*stream)
{
   /* Truncate address to the size of a target address, avoiding shifts
      larger or equal than the width of a CORE_ADDR.  The local
      variable ADDR_BIT stops the compiler reporting a shift overflow
      when it won't occur. */
   /* NOTE: This assumes that the significant address information is
      kept in the least significant bits of ADDR - the upper bits were
      either zero or sign extended.  Should ADDRESS_TO_POINTER() or
      some ADDRESS_TO_PRINTABLE() be used to do the conversion?  */
   int addr_bit = TARGET_ADDR_BIT;
   if (addr_bit < (sizeof (CORE_ADDR) * HOST_CHAR_BIT))
     addr &= ((CORE_ADDR) 1 << addr_bit) - 1;
   print_longest (stream, 'x', use_local, (ULONGEST) addr);
}

So, Fred, yes ok but steal the above code and comment.

Andrew